As if to console us for the problems and anxieties of modern living, the vine, man's old comforter and friend, has been exceedingly kind to us over the past decade. Certainly never before has there been such a remarkable succession of good vintages and bountiful harvests since World War II. We have had almost no lean years at all, none even comparable, at least, to those of that bitter and hungry interregnum of 1930-32.
Possibly we have come to take our good fortune too much for granted and expeor another “year of the century” to be unveiled every autumn. Yet it is unquestionably true that much of all this is due, not to sheer good luck, but to a vast increase in technical knowledge and skill among both vine growers and vintners. What were catastrophes thirty years ago are now problems of manageable proportions, and when something odd and disquieting seems to be taking place in a vineyard or in a cellar, one simply calls for the most competent nearby technical expert, as a few more enlightened vintners have been doing since the time of Pasteur. But today there are many more experts than there were, and far fewer ignorant vintners.
If this progress continues, as we hope it will, vintage charts may become less and less necessary. I myself am doubtful of the value of many of them today, particularly the small pocket kind. One digit can hardly give an accurate appraisal of the wines of a thousand different vineyards, their value, their original excellence, and their present quality.
What follows attempts at least to be something a little more complicated and quite different: a fairly detailed description of the wines of each major district and each year. It is based on carefully kept notes, made at the time of tasting, covering some four thousand wines comparatively tasted every year for more years than I like to admit. The commeres are as disinterested and honest as I can make them, but of course they represent, inevitably, just one expert's personal opinion.
Ratings, 1 to 20, are based on the relative value and quality of the wines today, not on what they were when originally produced or first marketed. 18-20=Very Great, 16-17=Great, 15=Very Good, 14=Good, 12-13=Fair, 11=Poor, 10 and under=Very Poor. Where no ratings are given, the wines are either loo old to be interesting or no longer on the market today.
Red Bordeaux
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): Fair in the Médoc, elsewhere poor, like 1956 and 1954. Between 10/20 and 13/20.
1962. Surprisingly (for the weather was miserable until late June), this proved to be both a copious year and an extremely good one. In total production, it was the largest since the last war; in quality, it was very nearly “great,” easily better than 1960, 1958, 1957, 1956, and 1954. The lesser wines are fruity, attractive, soft, with fine bouquet; many of them will be in bottle and ready to drink by March, 1964. In the upper brackets, too, the ’62s promise to be early maturing and relatively short lived. and we should probably expect to drink them before the firmer and sturdier ’61s. They arc perfect Clarets of their type, and good values. 16/20.
1961. This was an exceedingly great vintage in Bordeaux, one of the best of this century. The crop was a small one; the wines were expensive from the start and will remain so, but their quality can be described only as superb, better than 1959 in St. Éimilion and Pomerol, and in the Métloc at least as good. However, they are quite different from the ’59s in character and what the French call “grain”—more closely knit, less charming, but better balanced and surely destined to be longer lived. A few of the smaller ’61s are now being bottled and shipped; they are excellent (although all of them could stand more age) but provide only a modest preview of what we can expect of the greater wines to come. These, especially the bigger ones, will hardly be ready to drink before 1966 at the earliest. 20/20. 1960. The wine have now had a year in bottle and we can judge them fairly: they are the pleasantest little fellows imaginable—fruity, delightful, ready to drink. They resemble the ’54s but arc better; they are anything but great and they will last. Unfortunately, many of them are overpriced. Drink them and enjoy them; do not put them away. 13/20.
1959. Hailed from the outset as the “Vintage of the Century,” 1959 possibly deserved this name in Burgundy (where the quality was excellent and the quantity broke all records), but in Bordeaux it was simply a great year, or very great year, comparable to 1953, 1947, 1934, 1929, yielding wines of immense early charm, which for the next half decade will delight us but most of which, ten years from now, will be gone. Until then. 18/20.
1958. This, for a long time, was a sort of ugly duckling vintage, overshadowed by the full-bodied ’57s and the obviously superior ’59s. It is nevertheless a good year; the wines have come round extremely well and (hey are now about the best values available—sound, well balanced, nor too expensive. 14/20.
1957. Very full-bodied wines, still hud and unpleasing, There arc a lew exceptions, and it is possible but by no means certain that some may eventually prove great. Like 1926 and 1937. 13/20.
1936. A poor year. Some pleasant, small wines now past their prime. 10/20.
1955. Under rared at the beginning, a very good, nearly great year, which has delighted and surprised nearly everybody, giving us Clarets not too expensive, often distinguished, always sound. They will not last forever and should be drunk. 15/20.
1954. This year produced wines very like the ’60s, although possibly less good. Charming and short-lived, most of them are over the hill, 1½0.
1953. A very great year, nor unlike 1959 in character, better in the Médoc than in St, Êmillion and Pomerol. Ten years, of course, is a great age for any wine save a very good one. and all except the really outstanding ’53s have long since been joyously consumed, liven the best are not far from their peak: drink them, 17/20.
Earlier years: Few are worth buying unless one can be sure of their origin and that they have been properly stored. The ’45s and ’49s in most cases arc still admirable; the ’47s less consistently so; 1952 has proved (with a few exceptions in St. Êmillion and Pomerol) good, not great, Most of the others are history.
White Bordeaux
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): Poor, possibly with some exceptions among the dry Graves. 10/20 to 12/20.
1962. A very great year. Perhaps even belter than 1961, which is anything but faint praise, Both Graves and Sauternes are a bit lighter than in 1961, with great breed and fruit and charm. 19/20.
1961. A very great year, of classic excellence and character. Rather big, well-balanced, long-lived wines, the Graves now perfection, the Sauternes just coming on the market. 18/20.
1960. Mediocre. The dry wines often small and bitter. going downhill. A few fairly nice not-too-sweet Sauternes. 12/20.
1959. Very great in Sautertnes, where the wines are almost overwhelming in their richness and power. The Graves are golden, high in alcohol, a bit sweet, not for all palate. 13/20 to 18/20.
1958. Undistinguished. 13/20.
Older white Bordeaux are only interesting in the rather restricted sector of Sauternes. There are those who will think highly of the 1956 vintage, as I do, although it is generally rated poor, because the great Sauternes, including Yquem, are lighter and very racy and less sweet than usual. A few ’55 Graves have survived, but only those stored under ideal conditions; all other Graves older than the ’61s are poor risks.
Red Burgundy
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): Spotty, but better than expected, fair to very good; doubtless some excellent values if carefully selected. 13/20 to 15/20.
1962. This, for which the outlook was utterly dismal until the end of June, proved to be the Year of the Wonderful Surprise—bountiful, of excellent quality. Eight weeks of perfect weather, lasting through the vintage, confounded all the pessimists, gave some of the best white wines of the past decade and reds that can properly and honestly be called “great”—an overworked adjective, this time deserved. They have developed and matured more successfully than any of us expected and are surprisingly close in quality to the ’61s; in certain wines, they are even to be preferred. 18/20.
1961. An exceedingly great year, better in average quality than even 1959, for the wines arc better balanced, firmer, slower to mature, and will be longer-lived. The production was very small and the wines are expensive, but it is hard to see how they could be any better, and there has not been a vintage since World War II that I would so unhesitatingly recommend for laying down. At the same time, the smaller wines, which have already been shipped and arc ready to drink, arc hardly less admirable in their class. 19/20,. and perhaps deserves the ultimate accolade of 20/20.
1960. Although good in white wines, produced reds so poor that they need hardly concern us. Few, if any, were estate bottled, and few shipped unblended. 10/20.
1959. Tin's year was immediately christened the “Vintage of the Century” and in many ways it was. It yielded, so far as we know, the largest crop of fine wine in the modern history of Burgundy; although the whites were too heavy and clearly less good, the reds were delicious and charming and ready to drink almost at once. I felt it my duty promptly to advise the readers of GOURMET to buy them, to enjoy them, but to consume all except the very best of them within five or six years, and things have worked out about as predicted. The very finest ’59s arc still improving, now superb; the others should be drunk before they lose their grace and charm—by 1965 at the latest. 17/20 or 18/20.
1958. Spotty and not much more than passable. 12/20. 1957. Big, firm, sturdy wines, harsh and unattractive when first presented. The really good ones, however, are beginning to come round and to fulfill their early promise. They will outlast the ’59s, and some of the fine Côtes de Nuits will prove extraordinary, following the evolution of the ’49s and ’45s. 16/20, some deserving more.
1956. Best forgotten.
1955. Pleasant wines which at their apogee almost deserved the term “great.” They arc tiring today and will not last. 14/20.
1954. Long since gone and no loss either.
1953. Charmers from the beginning, they are very like the ’59s; the big wines that were perfectly stored have retained all their softness and body; the others are growing old and some are throwing heavy sediment. 14/20. 1952. Less attractive than 1953 at the beginning, it has held belter, and is better today. If selected carefully, 15/20.
A few rare ’49s, the best ’47s, and certain ’45s arc still grandes bouteilles. Buy them only in small lots and from sure suppliers.
Beajolais
Engaging, fruity, fresh, eminently drinkable, Beaujolais is a wine that improves hardly at all with age. In Paris, as in Lyon, it is consumed (as “open wine”) cheerfully and copiously as soon as it reaches the precocious age of three months, and a Beaujolais five years old is considered past its prime. We in America must perforce be a little more patient, wait at least until the wine is bottled and can stand shipment, which takes from nine months to a year. But here, too, we can almost say “the younger, the better.” though with a few reservations, since a Beaujolais of a poor year, however delicious in a French bistro, rarely travels well.
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): Fair to good. The cheaper wines, very light, arc for immediate consumption and will not last; some, from superior vineyards, arc sound and interesting. 12/20 to 14/20.
1962. Following the pattern of red Burgundy, has improved beyond anyone's expectations and is very close in quality to 1961 today. Actually, the cheaper grades (Beaujolais and Beaujolais Villages) now cost more in bulk than the equivalent ’61s. but this is due to the Frenchman's preference for young Beaujolais and the dismal outlook for 1963, not to anything else. The wines, however, are excellent and consistently so, perhaps a shade lighter than the ’61s and unlikely to improve as much in bottle, but if we never get worse we can hardly complain. 18/20.
1961. On the whole the best vintage since World War II, incomparably superior to ’59, ’57, and other recent favorites. The finer wines, such as Fleurie, Droit illy, Juliénas, etc, are of a class rarely equaled and are maturing magnificently in bottle. Of course, they should all be happily consumed by the end of 1965, or thereabouts, if you want them at their best. 19/20.
1960. A disaster. The few wines that were bottled should never have been shipped. 1959. A very good year. The wines, if honestly vintaged, are too old.
WHITE BURGUNDY
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): Fair to great. Like 1962, an extraordinarily copious year, so much so that many lesser wines are too light and thin. To everyone's surprise, some truly great wines as well. 13/20 to 17/20.
1962. A truly sensational year. Everywhere except in Pouilly-Fuissé there was not only high quality but great quantity as well, and all sorts of venerable production records were broken in Chablis. Unless 1963 proves a total disaster, prices should come down. In quality, the ’62s are finer, lighter, racier, and with more bouquet than even the admirable ’61s; they will mature very quickly and may not last. All except the really big ones will be shipped in 1964; most of them will be ready at once and they are utterly delightful. 18/20.
1961. A very great vintage, certainly better than any of its predecessors since 1952. Typical, well-balanced, admirable white Burgundies in the great tradition—fine, not too heavy, grande classe, nearly the first in ten years that I would recommend for laying down. The good ones will far outlast the ’62s. 19/20.
1960. This, in white Burgundy, could be called an “expert's year”—those who know how to taste and select on their own can find astonishing bargains, wines far superior to the vaunted ’59s yet much less expensive. The good estate bottlings are among the best white wine values on the market today. 15/20.
1959. Overrated from the beginning and obviously short-lived, these wines are beginning to disappoint even their early partisans. Big. and impressive at the Stan, they were never well balanced, never had much breed, arc beginning to go. 13/20,
1958. Admirable wines which rarely received their just due of praise. Clean, light, racy, distingués they are still at their peak but no longer, alas, available. 17/20.
1957. Hard, ungracious, even a little green at the outset. the ’57s of top origin have matured at last, are now bouquetés, still youthful, perfect. 16/20.
1956. Poor to start with. Gone.
1955. Never very great, now growing old. A few still good, Charitably, 14/20.
While Burgundy is not a wine that gains with age. A fair number of ’52s, some ’50s, and rare ’47s are still in sound condition.
CÔTES DU RHÔNE
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): Fair to good, as almost always, in vins roses. Red wines poor, like ’56 and ’54. 10/20 to 14/20.
1962. A very good year. The rosés (such as Tavel, Linc, etc.) are already in bottle, and much superior to the ’61s, being lighter, finer, and lower in alcohol: the same thing holds true of the whites. The red wines arc fruity and round and most agreeable; they will mature quickly and some of them should be on the market in1964. 16/20.
1961. In red wine (Châteauneuf-du-Pape, for example) an exceedingly great vintage. Wines of wonderful balance, great class; far from ready, not to be thought of before 1965. 18/20. Roses and whites rather on the heavy side, not too attractive 12/20.
1960. Full-bodied wines, but round and soft rather than firm and astringent. They have matured well and are already fit to drink although still improving. 15/20. 1959. The Rhône wines, especially those from the southern part of the valley, around Avignon, do not follow the same vintage pattern as the rest of France. Although in Hermitage (as practically everywhere in France) 1959 was a better year than 1960, this was not the case in Châteauneuf-du-Pape, which deserves no better rating than 14/20. The rosés, of course, are now too old.
1958. Better balanced than 1959, not too heavy, fine Quite ready to drink today but still improving. 15/20.
1957. Extremely big wines, slow-maturing and still harsh. They are by no means ready, and should be laid away. They will probably prove remarkable. 16/20.
1956. Mediocre. Off the market.
1935. Wines of outstanding quality, now at their peak. Round, fine, well balanced. 17/20.
1954. Very, very poor. Under 10/20.
1953. Much less good than in the rest of France 12/20.
1952. If genuine, exceedingly great. Ripe and splendid today but showing no trace of old age. 19/20.
Loire Valley
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): Fair in general, good Sancerre, Pouilly-Fumé. 12/20 to 14/20.
1962. A very good year which in certain districts could perhaps be called great. Thus the Pouilly-Fumés, Sancerres, and Quincys are wines of extraordinary fruit and bouquet, not too heavy, fresh and charming—the best balanced in nearly a decade. The Muscadets, Saumurs, Anjous, etc. are perhaps a shade less good than the ’61s but of excellent class. 16/20 to 18/20.
1961. A very good and consistent year, better in red wines (Chinon, Bourgueil, Champigny) than 1962; excellent in Vouvray and Anjou. 17/20.
1960. Just passable. Now off the market.
1959. Very ripe, full-bodied wines; attractive in their youth, they did not last, most of them being too high in alcohol. There arc a few exceptions among the red wines and the sweeter Anjous. 12/20 to 15/20.
Alsace
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): A large crop, not too far from 1961 and 1962 in quality. Fair to very good. On the average, perhaps 14/20.
1962. An outstanding year of light, fine, delicate, racy wines, Most of these are just now being bottled and will be shipped in the spring of 1964. 15/20.
1961. A good and pleasant year, quite in the class with 1962, but yielding somewhat fuller-bodied, riper wines. 14/20.
1960. Very large crop. Mediocre. 1½0 today.
1959. A very great year, as in Germany. Here in Alsace. however, the wines are almost too heavy, especially the Gewürztraminers, and lack sprightliness and charm. Some Rieslings of quite remarkable class. 15/20.
Champagne
A detailed vintage chart for Champagne cannot help being a little ridiculous: in five years out of ten the wine never even pretends to go to the consumer in an unblended state, and admittedly would be less good if it did; and what proportion of which vintage goes into a nonvintage Champagne is a well-kept trade secret.
It is certainly more sensible, therefore, to reserve comment on what might be called the “buried” years—those chat disappeared into the nonvintage—and discuss only those that have been, or may be, presented as millésimer: 1962, 1961, 1959, 1957, 1955, 1953 and 1952. It is too early to comment on the quality of 1963, except to say that it will probably not carry a vintage. It will certainly be a very large crop, however, and the fifth large crop in successive years: the Champagne vineyards produced nearly as much wine in these five years as in the preceding ten. and there now appears to be some possible, eventual hope of a price reduction.
1962. An excellent, consistent, and copious year, fully equal in quality to 1961, perhaps the best since 1955 or even 1952. Since the wines are just now beginning to acquire their sparkle, it is too early to say more. As a guess. 17/20.
1961. Also an excellent year, and many houses, though perhaps not all, will present it as a vintage in 1965 or 1966. Again, about 17/20.
1959. A so-called “very great” year. It produced very big, full-bodied wines, so high' in alcohol that, without a judicious admixture of 1960, they could hardly have been refermented and made sparkling. There are some very good cuvées, others that are too heavy, and, in any case, hardly any as good as the best ’55s. With rare exceptions, they lack sprightliness, delicacy, and charm, and they are not likely to improve. 15/20.
1957. A pitifully small crop, not marketed as a vintage by most houses. The wines at the beginning were green and hard, but many have come round in better fashion than expected. 15/20.
1955. Although not a truly outstanding year, it has given wines that please everybody—sound, light, well balanced, with their full share of finesse and bouquet. They are racier and have more elegance than the ’53s and ’59s, and if they are not up to the ’52s—well, few Champagnes are or will be in our lifetime. 17/20. 1955. Highly touted and extravagantly praised, especially at the beginning, the ’53s have always been far below the ’52s in quality. Very full wines and, like the ’59s, high in alcohol, they now lack distinction and grace, and these are qualities that Champagnes rarely acquire as they grow older. To be drunk, not laid away. 14/20.
1952. An exceedingly great vintage, certainly the best of the past two decades, quite comparable to that “incomparable” year, 1928. The ’52s of top cuvées are practically unprocurable, but it is hard to see how they could be better than they still are today. 19/20.
Rhine and Moselle
1963. Probable quality (evaluation as of November 15): A very good year, one of the most copious since the last war. The estate-bottlings promise to be in the class with the ’62s. better on the Rhine than on the Moselle. 14/20 to 15/20, but a great deal of inferior wine of much lower quality.
1962. A very fine, light year, especially on the Rhine, where the wines are very like the ’61s in both character and quality, although a shade better in most cases. They are light, fragrant, pleasing, generally on the dry side, not great. 16/20. Less consistent on the Moselle where there was a large crop and many wines, thin and too low in alcohol, had to be sugared. Scattered vineyards, especially on the Star, produced natur wines of superior class, but in small quantity. About 14/20. At least 17/20 in Pfalz, however.
1961. A very good year, but by no means the remarkable vintage that it proved in France, The Rhines are fresh, graceful, and attractive, not unlike the ’58s, dry for the most part, and now quite ready. 15/20. The Moselles, bottled later as always, are just beginning to develop their full bouquet; they are light, charming, and typical. 16/20.
1960. A year of small wines although rather good in the Pfalz. Most of them had to be sugared and they will not last. 12/20.
1959. An exceedingly great year, certainly unsurpassed since the last war and, as far as the better wines are concerned, comparable to 1921. But wine-making methods in Germany have changed greatly in the last four decades; the wines are now bottled much earlier, in order to conserve their freshness and fruit, and. there being a great demand for them, the ’59s were presented when they were by no means ready and had acquired neither balance nor bouquet. It is a great mistake to drink the great German wines thus, when they are like unfortunate overweight adolescents, and do not show either their true character or their “line.” The great ’59s are just now coming into their own; they are much better and they seem less obvious and much less sweet; they will continue to improve for at least five or six years—but this is true only of the selected wines of top origin. These deserve not far from 20/20. The smaller wines are already past their prime.
1958. A very good year, now in great demand in Germany. The little, common, sugared wines arc gone, but the better Naturweine are at present at their peak—dry. fine, bouquetés, light, distinguished, as the ’61s and ’62s will be a year or two from now. 15/20.
Except for the sweet and expensive rarities—Beerencuslesen, Trockenbeerenauslesen, etc.—German wines older than the ’58s are a poor risk.
Italy
In the past ten or fifteen years, Italian wines have made thousands of new friends in the United States. Most of us like Italian food, and nothing is belter with it than Italian wine; many of us have visited Italy and found the local wines both excellent and interesting—uncomplicated, appetizing, and attractive.
The majority of Italian wines are made to be drunk when young—only a few reds (the finer Chiantis, certain rare Valpolicellas, and the Barolos and Barbarescos of the Province of Piedmont) improve much with age.
Almost all of the white wines, and the few roses which are exported (Chiarello, Chiaretto, etc.), are at their best when under three years old, and for these a vintage chart is quite unnecessary.
The finest grades of Chianti are shipped in ordinary wine bottles, like Bordeaux, and these do improve with aging. The others in the familiar straw-covered fiaschi are ready to drink well before their third birthday, and in Florence you will find them served even younger.
For those worth laying down, here are the best recent years: Chianti: 1962, 1961, 1958, 1957; Valpolicella: 1962, 1961; Barola, Barbaresco: 1962, 1961, 1958, 1956, 1955.